Well, with keeping it as 'ref:penndot', it would allow some of the outside cases where the internal route numbers on the primary system have a different number on the little white signs. As an example, take a look at PA-380 [1]. It's internal number is SR-400 since 'SR-380' is applied to I-380. This is one of a few cases like this. Another example like this is PA-99 [2] which is officially SR-699 because I-99 has the 'SR-99' number (but wasn't always the case as both shared it for awhile till 2008). Even PA-283 is 'SR-300' because I-283 is 'SR-283' [3]. I think there are a few other cases like this, but I can't recall them right now, but some of them might be split state routes where one half is the base number, and the other half another number if there is no chance of them being joined.
-James [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_380 [2] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_99 [3] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_Route_283 > To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org > From: m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us > Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:06:14 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Pennsylvania's quadrant routes > > On 2015-01-16 07:52, Paul Johnson wrote: > > I'm very much in favor of PA instead of SR for disambiguation purposes. > > With James' proposal to change `ref` to `ref:penndot` (or something even > more explicit like `ref:penndot:quadrant`), there's no need for > disambiguation. A prefix of "PA" isn't going to solve the problem of > mappers conflating PennDOT's two networks either. > > -- > m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
